Introduction
Your surveyor has 200 five-star reviews.
That sounds reassuring.
And it should be.
A large number of positive reviews can tell you a great deal about how a business treats its clients.
But there is another question worth asking:
Were the surveys actually any good?
That is much harder for the average homebuyer to answer.
A previous client can usually tell you whether:
- the surveyor was friendly;
- emails were answered promptly;
- the inspection was arranged quickly;
- the report arrived when promised;
- the document looked professional; and
- somebody called them afterwards.
What they may be considerably less able to establish is whether:
- cracking was interpreted correctly;
- a damp diagnosis was technically sound;
- traditional construction was properly understood;
- a significant alteration should have raised further questions;
- the recommended repair method was appropriate;
- further investigation was genuinely necessary;
- the report had been properly technically reviewed; or
- an important defect was missed altogether.
That does not make online reviews useless.
Far from it.
We display our own client reviews prominently because we think previous clients’ experiences are valuable.
But a five-star review tells you that somebody had a good experience. It does not necessarily prove that they received good technical advice.
When choosing somebody to advise you on a property worth hundreds of thousands of pounds, we think reviews should be one part of your decision rather than the decision itself.
Speak to a member of the team
Why Do Homebuyers Rely So Heavily on Reviews?
Because they are easy to understand.
You may know very little about:
- MRICS;
- AssocRICS;
- Building Surveying;
- building pathology;
- Level 2 and Level 3 Home Surveys;
- traditional construction;
- defect diagnosis;
- professional indemnity insurance; or
- technical quality assurance.
But everyone understands:
4.9 stars from 250 reviews.
That makes reviews incredibly powerful.
Many consumer guides understandably recommend checking them when selecting a Building Surveyor.
Reviews can therefore become an easy way of deciding between apparently similar firms.
If three companies all offer a Level 3 survey and one has the highest rating, why wouldn’t you choose them?
The difficulty is that professional advice is unusually difficult for the customer to assess.
The Client Often Doesn’t Know Whether the Advice Was Correct
Consider a restaurant.
You eat the meal.
You know whether you enjoyed it.
Or a hotel.
You know whether the room was clean and the bed was comfortable.
A Building Survey is different.
Imagine your surveyor tells you:
“Elevated moisture readings indicate rising damp. Obtain quotations for damp-proofing works.”
You may have absolutely no reason to question that advice.
The surveyor was personable.
The report arrived quickly.
It contained plenty of photographs.
You leave a five-star review.
Six months later, you discover the problem was actually caused by defective rainwater disposal and inappropriate cement render.
The customer experience may genuinely have been excellent.
The technical advice may not have been.
The same issue can arise with:
- structural movement;
- roof defects;
- timber decay;
- condensation;
- drainage;
- alterations;
- historic construction; and
- repair recommendations.
Unless another professional subsequently challenges the advice, you may never know.
That creates an important limitation:
The person leaving the review is often judging the service without having the technical knowledge required to independently judge the professional advice.
A Five-Star Review Can Still Be Completely Genuine
This distinction is important.
This article isn’t primarily about fake reviews.
A completely genuine review from a completely genuine customer can still tell you relatively little about technical competence.
The client may genuinely believe:
“Brilliant survey. Very thorough.”
But how have they determined thoroughness?
Number of pages?
Number of photographs?
How long the surveyor spent at the property?
How frightening the defect list looked?
Whether the surveyor sounded confident?
Those things may correlate with quality.
But none proves it.
A 120-page report containing large amounts of generic information isn’t necessarily more useful than a 70-page report containing better diagnosis and property-specific advice.
Likewise, a report containing dozens of requests for specialist investigations may appear cautious and comprehensive while actually transferring much of the difficult professional judgement elsewhere.
Presentation and technical quality are not necessarily the same thing.
There Is Also the Question of Whether Reviews Are Genuine
There is a second, separate issue.
The UK has strengthened consumer law around fake and misleading reviews.
From April 2025, practices including commissioning or publishing fake reviews and publishing paid reviews without clearly identifying them as incentivised became banned practices under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024.
The Competition and Markets Authority has also increased scrutiny of potentially misleading review practices.
Read the CMA guidance on fake reviews.
That doesn’t mean you should distrust every review you read.
It demonstrates why regulators recognise that online reviews can significantly influence consumer decisions.
But for Building Surveys, authenticity is only half the question.
Even if every review is genuine, you still need to ask:
Was the reviewer actually in a position to judge the technical quality of the work?
So What Are Reviews Actually Good For?
Quite a lot.
We would actively use reviews to assess matters such as:
Communication
Did the firm reply promptly?
Were instructions clear?
Did they keep the purchaser informed?
Reliability
Did the surveyor attend when promised?
Was the report issued within the stated timescale?
Client care
Were questions answered?
Was the surveyor approachable?
Did the client feel listened to?
Aftercare
Could the purchaser speak to somebody after receiving the report?
Were significant findings explained?
General professionalism
Did the process feel organised and competent?
These are all meaningful parts of a professional surveying service.
A technically excellent surveyor who never answers emails, issues reports late and refuses to explain their conclusions isn’t providing a particularly good overall service.
Reviews are therefore useful.
They simply measure some aspects of quality much better than others.
What Can a Review Tell You – and What Can’t It?
| Reviews can often help you assess | Reviews may be much less reliable for assessing |
|---|---|
| Communication | Whether damp was correctly diagnosed |
| Punctuality | Whether structural movement was properly interpreted |
| Report turnaround | Whether repair methodology is technically appropriate |
| Ease of booking | Whether traditional construction was properly understood |
| Friendliness | Whether statutory alterations were recognised |
| Responsiveness | Whether further investigations were proportionate |
| Whether the report appeared detailed | Whether significant defects were missed |
| Post-survey service | Whether the advice will prove correct after opening-up |
| Overall customer experience | Depth of building pathology knowledge |
| Whether the client felt reassured | Whether the surveyor’s professional judgement was sound |
| Whether the report looked polished | Whether another surveyor technically reviewed it |
This is why we would never recommend choosing a surveyor on star rating alone.
A Very Reassuring Survey Can Generate a Very Good Review
There is another uncomfortable point worth considering.
Sometimes good professional advice isn’t particularly reassuring.
A surveyor might tell a purchaser:
- the roof requires substantial renewal;
- structural movement needs investigating;
- previous alterations raise regulatory concerns;
- the building contains inappropriate historic repairs;
- significant expenditure should be anticipated; or
- they would reconsider the purchase unless further information is obtained.
That may be exactly what the client needs to hear.
It may not be what they wanted to hear.
Conversely, an overly reassuring survey may make somebody feel extremely comfortable about proceeding.
That creates an unusual relationship between client satisfaction and professional quality.
A happy client is obviously desirable.
But the job of a surveyor isn’t simply to make a purchaser feel good about buying the property.
The job is to provide an independent professional opinion.
Sometimes the best advice is uncomfortable.
Report Speed Can Distort Reviews Too
Look through reviews of professional services and you will regularly see praise for:
“Report received the next day.”
“24-hour turnaround.”
“Really quick service.”
Again, those are genuinely positive customer-service experiences.
But speed alone doesn’t tell you whether sufficient professional consideration was given to the findings.
A detailed Building Survey may require time after inspection to:
- review photographs;
- compare defects;
- consider probable causes;
- research unusual construction;
- examine planning or listed-building information;
- formulate appropriate repair advice;
- estimate budget costs; and
- reflect upon how different findings relate to one another.
At Fourth Wall, we could expedite more reports than we routinely do.
In most cases, we deliberately allow time between inspection and issue because we believe reflective professional consideration improves the advice.
Where there is a genuine deadline — for example an auction or imminent exchange — we can expedite work where appropriate.
But residential conveyancing commonly lasts considerably longer than a day or two.
We see little benefit in rushing one of the few professional advisers who physically visits the property simply so that “report arrived within 24 hours” becomes another five-star review.
Don’t Judge a Survey by Page Count Either
Another phrase you will regularly see in reviews is:
“The report was incredibly detailed – more than 100 pages.”
That sounds impressive.
And sometimes it genuinely reflects an exceptionally comprehensive survey.
But page count is not a reliable measure of technical quality either.
A report can become very long through:
- extensive standard descriptions;
- generic maintenance advice;
- repeated caveats;
- explanations of basic construction;
- large photographs; and
- template information.
What matters is whether the property-specific advice helps you understand:
What is wrong?
Why has it happened?
How significant is it?
What should be done?
What might it cost?
What needs investigating before exchange?
How does this affect my purchasing decision?
We actively encourage prospective Fourth Wall clients to request a sample report for exactly this reason.
Our House Survey Calculator also recommends reviewing a recent anonymised sample and considering whether it provides property-specific diagnosis, practical repair advice, sensible further investigations and budget costs where promised.
A sample report tells you considerably more about the product than somebody else’s statement that it was “very detailed”.
Qualification Gives You Something Reviews Cannot
This is where professional qualifications become particularly useful.
Reviews are opinions.
Professional membership is independently verifiable.
RICS provides a public Find a Member database through which you can check whether an individual is an active RICS professional and view their membership information.
That does not mean an RICS qualification guarantees excellent advice.
We have discussed this in detail in Does My Home Surveyor Need to Be Chartered?.
Relevant experience still needs to be investigated.
But professional qualification gives the consumer something fundamentally different from a review:
an independently assessed and independently verifiable professional benchmark.
That is why we believe it should come before reviews when selecting a surveyor.
Check the Firm as Well as the Individual
You should also distinguish between the surveying company and the person carrying out the inspection.
RICS recommends checking whether the business you appoint is a RICS Regulated firm, which provides additional consumer protections and requires the firm to comply with RICS regulatory requirements.
RICS guidance on regulated firms.
But RICS Regulated does not mean that every individual working for the firm is a Chartered Surveyor.
So check both.
Is the firm RICS Regulated?
Then:
Who will actually undertake my survey and what qualification do they personally hold?
If a firm’s website repeatedly promotes “RICS Regulated” but gives very little information about the qualifications and experience of the individuals actually carrying out surveys, ask for clarification.
The company badge and the surveyor’s personal professional status answer different questions.
Relevant Experience Comes Next
Once you have verified the qualification, investigate the experience.
This should go beyond:
“20 years in property.”
Ask:
- How regularly do you undertake this type of survey?
- How many similar buildings have you inspected?
- Do you regularly undertake Level 3 surveys?
- Do you have experience with this age of property?
- Do you understand this form of construction?
- Do you undertake building defect investigations?
- Do you specify and manage repair work?
- Have you worked with historic or listed buildings where relevant?
- What experience do you have of planning, Building Regulations and Listed Building Consent?
We discuss this in more detail in How Much Experience Should Your Home Surveyor Have?.
Experience matters because the value of a Building Survey does not lie simply in recognising defects.
It lies in interpreting them.
Experience Can Produce Better Advice Without Producing a Better Review
Suppose two surveyors inspect identical moisture staining.
Surveyor A reports:
“High damp-meter readings recorded. Obtain specialist damp report.”
The client understands the recommendation.
The report looks professional.
Five stars.
Surveyor B considers:
- wall construction;
- external ground level;
- cementitious pointing;
- rainwater disposal;
- previous alterations;
- ventilation;
- moisture distribution; and
- internal finishes.
They explain that the evidence is more consistent with penetrating moisture and reduced evaporation from inappropriate materials, recommend repair to the rainwater goods and external finishes before considering invasive damp treatment, and provide an indicative repair budget.
The second piece of advice required considerably more professional judgement.
But unless the first purchaser later discovers that their recommended damp treatment was unnecessary, both surveyors may receive exactly the same five-star rating.
That is the limitation.
Ask How the Report Is Quality Assured
Another important question, and one which is rarely discussed in reviews, is:
“Who checks my report before it is issued?”
Many surveying firms describe reports as being “quality checked” or “quality assured”.
Those phrases can mean very different things.
In some firms, the inspecting surveyor effectively self-certifies the report.
They undertake the inspection, prepare the report, complete an internal checklist and issue it themselves.
That can still be a legitimate quality-control model, particularly where the individual is experienced.
But it is not the same thing as a second-person technical review by another Building Surveyor.
A meaningful second-person QA process can provide an additional opportunity to challenge:
- defect diagnoses;
- inconsistencies between photographs and written advice;
- disproportionate recommendations for further investigation;
- repair methodologies;
- indicative costs;
- statutory and legal queries;
- missing observations;
- contradictions between sections; and
- whether the executive summary properly reflects the most significant risks.
That can be particularly valuable on complicated Level 3 surveys where there may be several interacting defects and a greater degree of professional judgement involved.
At Fourth Wall, we do not operate a self-certification QA model.
Our reports are reviewed by another appropriately experienced surveyor before issue.
The purpose is not simply to check spelling, formatting or whether every field has been completed.
It provides a second professional perspective on the advice being given.
The inspecting surveyor remains responsible for their professional opinions, but another surveyor can challenge assumptions, spot inconsistencies and ask whether the advice really follows from the evidence.
That additional professional scrutiny costs time to provide.
We think it is worthwhile.
So when comparing firms, don’t simply ask:
“Is your report quality checked?”
Ask:
“What does your QA procedure actually involve, and will another surveyor technically review my report before it is issued?”
Those are very different questions.
QA Matters Because the Client Often Cannot Perform That Check Themselves
This brings us directly back to the limitations of reviews.
A homebuyer generally cannot technically QA their own Building Survey.
They are relying on the surveyor’s expertise.
If the report says:
“No evidence of significant structural movement was identified,”
the client usually cannot independently test whether that conclusion is reasonable.
If the surveyor recommends:
“Install a chemical damp-proof course,”
the client may not know whether the underlying diagnosis justifies that recommendation.
If the report says:
“No further action required,”
the purchaser has to decide whether to rely on that advice.
That is why internal technical review can be valuable.
Another experienced surveyor may be better placed to ask:
Does that conclusion actually follow from the observations?
Have we overlooked another explanation?
Is that recommendation proportionate?
Does the cost align with the repair being proposed?
Is the executive summary giving the client the right message?
A five-star review cannot perform that role.
A second experienced professional potentially can.
Look at What Else the Surveyor Does
For detailed Level 3 surveys, we think wider Building Surveying experience can provide considerable value.
A surveyor who also:
- investigates defects;
- specifies repairs;
- administers construction projects;
- inspects failed workmanship;
- works with structural engineers;
- deals with listed buildings; and
- revisits buildings while repairs are being undertaken
develops a different feedback loop from somebody whose entire experience consists of producing pre-purchase reports.
At Fourth Wall, our residential surveyors work across wider Building Surveying, repair, project and conservation disciplines.
That means the advice is informed not only by seeing defects during surveys, but by seeing buildings opened up, repairs specified, work undertaken and sometimes previous repair approaches fail.
That wider experience is one reason our Level 3 Building Survey focuses on practical repair advice and the financial implications of defects rather than simply recording their existence.
Ask Who Will Actually Survey Your House
This is another point reviews can obscure.
A company might have 500 excellent reviews.
But which of its surveyors generated them?
If the firm employs ten surveyors with different:
- qualifications;
- experience;
- specialisms;
- inspection styles; and
- reporting abilities,
the company’s overall rating tells you relatively little about the person being allocated to you.
That is why we recommend establishing the name of the inspecting surveyor before instruction.
Ask:
Who will actually attend?
What qualification do they hold?
What experience do they have?
Will they personally take responsibility for the report?
Who will technically QA their report?
Can I speak to them afterwards?
Our guide Who Will Actually Survey Your House? looks at this in more detail.
Check a Sample Report
If reviews tell you how previous clients felt about the service, a sample report lets you inspect the service itself.
Ask for one.
Then look at a significant defect.
Does the report merely state:
what can be seen?
Or does it explain:
what probably caused it?
why it matters?
what should be done?
how urgently?
whether additional investigation is genuinely necessary?
what broad cost should be anticipated?
Also consider:
- Is the advice property specific?
- Are photographs useful?
- Are recommendations practical?
- Does the report distinguish major risk from routine maintenance?
- Is there excessive reliance on standard clauses?
- Does the document help you make decisions?
- Does it identify who inspected the property?
- Does it identify who prepared or reviewed the report?
- Is the QA process explained?
At Fourth Wall, we are happy to provide prospective clients with sample reports.
We think this is a much better way of demonstrating what our service looks like than simply telling you that our surveys are detailed.
Our existing guidance on choosing a reliable surveyor similarly recommends looking at sample reports and the individual surveyor’s experience rather than relying solely on headline credentials.
Ask for the Surveyor’s Professional Background
You can go further.
For an older, listed, unusual, heavily altered or high-value property, there is nothing unreasonable about asking for information about the surveyor’s professional experience.
At Fourth Wall, we publish information about our surveyors and their experience on our About Us / Meet the Team page.
If you want more information, simply ask.
We can provide:
- professional experience CVs;
- relevant project examples;
- information about comparable instructions; and
- anonymised sample reports.
We think transparency should work both ways.
If we are asking somebody to rely upon our professional judgement when spending hundreds of thousands or millions of pounds, they are entitled to understand what experience sits behind that advice.
Reviews Should Support Verification – Not Replace It
Our approach is therefore not:
Ignore reviews.
It is:
Put reviews in the correct place.
We would suggest this order.
1. Verify the qualification
Can you independently establish the professional status of the individual?
2. Verify the firm
Is the business appropriately regulated and insured?
3. Establish who will undertake the survey
Don’t rely solely on company-level credentials.
4. Interrogate relevant experience
Has the individual actually worked with your type of property and the survey level you require?
5. Understand the QA process
Will another experienced surveyor technically review the report, or does the inspecting surveyor self-certify their own work?
6. Look at the output
Ask for a sample report.
7. Understand the service model
How much time is allocated? What advice is included? Are repair costs provided? Can you speak to the surveyor afterwards?
8. Then read the reviews
Use them to understand how previous clients experienced the service.
That makes reviews valuable supporting evidence, rather than asking them to prove something they were never particularly well suited to prove.
The Fourth Wall Review Reality Check
Before appointing a surveyor based heavily on their online rating, ask yourself these questions:
| Question | Why it matters |
| 1. Can I verify the inspecting surveyor’s qualification? | Reviews cannot independently establish professional status |
| 2. Do I know who will actually attend? | Company reviews may relate to several different surveyors |
| 3. Is their experience relevant to my property? | Years alone do not establish appropriate experience |
| 4. Have I seen a sample report? | This lets you assess the actual output rather than somebody else’s impression |
| 5. How is the report quality assured? | “QA checked” may mean self-certification or a genuine second-person technical review |
| 6. Can the surveyor explain and advise on repairs? | Recognition of defects and useful diagnosis are different things |
| 7. Can I speak to the surveyor afterwards? | Direct accountability and aftercare matter when significant findings arise |
| 8. What do the reviews actually praise? | Reviews are strongest when assessing service rather than unseen technical accuracy |
Suggested interactive feature
This could be turned into a simple Surveyor Verification Checker:
Surveyor / Firm: __________
- Professional qualification independently verified: Yes / No
- Individual surveyor named before instruction: Yes / No
- Comparable property experience established: Yes / No
- Sample report reviewed: Yes / No
- Second-person technical QA confirmed: Yes / No / Self-certified
- Repair/cost advice included: Yes / No
- Post-survey discussion available: Yes / No
- Reviews checked: Yes / No
Output:
Reviews are one part of your due diligence. You have independently verified X of the professional and service factors above.
The tool should never attempt to rank individual surveyors.
Its purpose is to encourage consumers to gather better information.
What About Negative Reviews?
Negative reviews can sometimes be particularly useful.
Don’t look only at the number of stars.
Look at what the complaint is actually about.
There is a meaningful difference between:
“They couldn’t fit my survey in until next week.”
and:
“The report did not address the structural alteration I specifically asked about.”
Likewise, read the company’s response.
Does it:
- engage professionally with the issue?
- explain what happened?
- acknowledge genuine shortcomings?
- offer a resolution?
- become defensive?
- disclose confidential information?
- dismiss the customer?
Professional firms will occasionally receive complaints.
The existence of a negative review is therefore not necessarily the most useful information.
How the business handles criticism can tell you considerably more.
Should You Avoid a Surveyor With No Reviews?
Not automatically.
A highly experienced surveyor may:
- have recently established a new practice;
- previously worked for a larger consultancy;
- obtain most work through professional referrals; or
- simply have never focused heavily on consumer-review platforms.
Conversely, a surveying company with thousands of reviews may operate at considerable volume.
The review count tells you something about the business.
It does not automatically establish the competence of the individual being assigned to your property.
If a surveyor has few reviews, rely more heavily on other evidence:
- professional qualification;
- CV;
- comparable experience;
- sample reports;
- firm regulation;
- QA procedures;
- professional references where appropriate; and
- direct conversation.
Again, independent verification is more useful than assuming the star count tells the whole story.
Should I Trust Google Reviews for a Building Surveyor?
Use them.
Just don’t stop there.
Google reviews can be particularly useful for understanding:
- responsiveness;
- communication;
- administration;
- turnaround; and
- overall client experience.
But the same limitation applies.
Most purchasers do not have the technical knowledge required to independently assess the accuracy of detailed Building Surveying advice.
Reviews should therefore sit alongside professional qualification, experience, QA and examples of actual work.
Are Trustpilot Reviews Better?
Different review platforms have different systems for collecting and moderating reviews. But no review platform can completely solve the underlying issue addressed in this article: the customer may not know whether the professional advice itself was correct.
Even a verified genuine review still reflects the reviewer’s own ability to judge the service.
We stopped using Trustpilot as a review page several years ago after they failed to remove fake reviews and wanted to charge thousands of pounds a year to get a better service. This doesn’t align with our ethics. We now exclusively use Google. So whether you are reading Google, Trustpilot or another platform, treat reviews as useful evidence of customer experience rather than an independent technical audit.
We Use Reviews Too
It would be slightly hypocritical for a surveying practice with positive customer reviews to tell people reviews don’t matter.
They do.
Fourth Wall publishes client feedback because we are proud of the service our team provides.
Our reviews commonly mention:
- detail;
- clarity;
- photographs;
- budget repair costs;
- post-survey discussion; and
- practical advice.
Those are exactly the sorts of things we want clients to value.
But we still don’t think you should appoint us simply because somebody else gave us five stars.
Look at our qualifications.
Look at our team’s experience.
Ask who will survey the property.
Ask how the report will be QA reviewed.
Look at a sample report.
Ask us questions.
Compare what we provide with somebody else.
Then read the reviews.
If all of those things point in the same direction, you have a much stronger basis for making your decision.
So, Can You Trust Building Surveyor Reviews?
Yes for what they are capable of telling you. Reviews can provide very useful evidence about:
- communication;
- reliability;
- responsiveness;
- customer service;
- turnaround; and
- how previous clients experienced the survey process.
What they cannot reliably prove on their own is the technical competence of the surveyor or the accuracy of their professional advice.
A five-star review doesn’t tell you whether a crack was interpreted correctly.
A 4.9 rating doesn’t prove the surveyor understands traditional construction.
Two hundred positive reviews don’t tell you who will actually inspect your house.
And “quality assured” doesn’t necessarily tell you whether anybody other than the author has technically reviewed the report.
So read the reviews.
But before appointing somebody to provide professional advice on one of the largest financial decisions you are likely to make:
verify the qualification;
check the individual;
interrogate the experience;
understand the QA process;
review the output;
and then use the reviews as supporting evidence.
Because a good customer experience matters.
But ultimately, you are paying for good professional advice.
Choosing a Building Surveyor?
If you’re comparing surveyors, our related guides may help:
Why Fourth Wall Recommends Level 2 or Level 3 Home buyer reports
Our firm of only chartered surveyors offer tailored, jargon‑free reports with exceptional local precision. We go beyond traffic‑light ratings, laying out repair timelines, estimated costs, and practical advice. That clarity and care make the moderate extra fee well worth it.
- Does My Home Surveyor Need to Be Chartered?
- How to Find a Reliable Surveyor When Buying a House
- Should You Choose the Cheapest Building Survey Quote?
- What Should a Home Survey Quote Actually Tell You?
- Who Will Actually Survey Your House?
- How Much Experience Should Your Home Surveyor Have?
- RICS Level 2 Home Surveys
- RICS Level 3 Building Surveys
- House Survey Cost Calculator
- Meet the Fourth Wall Team
Unique Insight: Treat Your Survey as an Investment
While first-time buyers often focus on keeping costs low, cutting corners on surveys can backfire. For example, in 2024 a Rugby buyer ignored a £500 recommended Level 3 survey on a £325,000 period home. Six months later, hidden damp repairs cost £8,000 far exceeding the original survey fee.
In short: the cost of a survey is minor compared to the cost of missed defects. Think of it as an insurance policy that pays for itself if even one issue is uncovered.
Calculate your house survey costGet a Home Survey Quote
If you are buying a property, you can use our House Survey Cost Calculator to receive an initial indication of the appropriate survey and likely fee.
We review the property and requirements before confirming the instruction, rather than treating every house of a particular value or bedroom count as the same surveying exercise.
You can also read:
- Does My Home Surveyor Need to Be Chartered?
- What Should a Home Survey Quote Actually Tell You?
- Why the Cheapest Building Survey Quote May Not Be the Cheapest Option
- How to Find a Reliable Surveyor When Buying a House
- RICS Level 3 Building Surveys
- Residential Surveying Services
Frequently Asked Questions
Written by Joshua Weston BSc (Hons) MRICS IHBC, Chartered Building Surveyor and Lead Director of Fourth Wall Building Consultancy.
Yes, but they should not be your only method of choosing a surveyor.
Reviews can provide useful information about communication, punctuality, report turnaround, client service and aftercare.
They are less reliable as evidence of technical competence because the average purchaser may not have the knowledge required to determine whether defect diagnosis and repair advice were professionally correct.
Use reviews alongside independently verifiable qualifications, relevant experience, QA procedures and sample reports.
Google reviews can be useful for assessing previous customers’ experience of the business.
However, even a completely genuine review does not necessarily establish that the technical Building Surveying advice was correct.
Check the individual’s professional qualification and experience separately, and ask how their reports are technically reviewed before issue.
There is no minimum number.
A long-established consumer surveying company may have hundreds or thousands of reviews.
An equally experienced surveyor who has recently established their own practice may have relatively few.
Review volume tells you something about the business’s history and volume of consumer instructions, but it should not replace qualification, relevant experience, QA and examples of work.
Not necessarily.
A five-star rating is positive evidence of customer satisfaction.
It does not independently prove technical competence.
The client may be well placed to assess communication and service but less able to determine whether cracking, damp, roof defects or alterations were professionally interpreted correctly.
Check:
the individual surveyor’s professional qualification;
whether the qualification can be independently verified;
who will actually undertake the inspection;
relevant experience of the property type;
Level 2 or Level 3 survey experience;
wider defect and repair knowledge;
whether the firm is appropriately regulated;
how the report is quality assured;
whether another surveyor technically reviews it before issue;
a recent sample report;
what advice is included;
report timescale; and
post-survey support.
Reviews should then provide another useful layer of information.
RICS provides a public Find a Member database which allows consumers to search for active qualified RICS professionals.
Do not rely solely on a company logo or marketing statement.
Check the individual who will actually undertake your survey.
No.
RICS Regulated relates to the surveying firm.
MRICS and FRICS are professional designations held by individual Chartered Surveyors, while AssocRICS denotes Associate membership.
A RICS-regulated firm may employ people with different membership grades and levels of professional experience.
Check both the firm and the individual.
Yes, particularly when commissioning a Level 3 Building Survey.
Many firms state that reports are “quality checked”, but it is worth understanding what that actually means.
In some businesses, the inspecting surveyor checks and signs off their own report using an internal checklist. This is effectively a self-certification model.
Other practices use a second surveyor to undertake a technical review before the report is issued.
A meaningful second-person QA process can help identify inconsistencies, challenge defect diagnoses, review repair recommendations and make sure significant risks have been properly reflected throughout the report.
At Fourth Wall, we do not use a self-certification QA model. Our reports are reviewed by another appropriately experienced surveyor before issue.
When comparing firms, ask:
“Will another surveyor technically review my report before it is issued, or does the inspecting surveyor sign off their own work?”
No.
No quality-assurance process can guarantee that every professional judgement will prove correct or that every concealed defect will be identified.
QA is an additional safeguard.
The inspecting surveyor still needs appropriate qualifications, relevant experience and sufficient professional time to undertake the instruction properly.
A second-person technical review can then challenge assumptions, identify inconsistencies and provide another experienced perspective before the advice reaches the client.
Fourth Wall does not operate a self-certification QA model.
The inspecting surveyor prepares and remains professionally responsible for the advice, but the report is reviewed by another appropriately experienced surveyor before issue.
The review considers more than presentation. It can include the consistency of findings, defect diagnosis, repair recommendations, costs, risk priorities and whether the executive summary properly reflects the detailed inspection findings.
We believe that second professional perspective is particularly valuable on detailed Level 3 and complex-property surveys.
Yes.
A recent anonymised sample report is one of the best ways to understand what you are buying.
Look at whether defects are simply identified or actually explained, whether advice is property specific, whether repairs are practical, whether priorities are clear and whether costs are provided where promised.
Also check whether the sample identifies the inspecting surveyor and explains how the report is quality assured.
A sample report allows you to assess the product rather than relying entirely on somebody else’s opinion of it.
Yes.
For an older, listed, altered, unusual or high-value property, there is nothing unreasonable about asking for more information about the individual’s professional background.
At Fourth Wall, we publish overviews of our surveyors and their professional experience on our About Us page.
If you would like more detail, simply ask. We can provide relevant professional experience CVs, project information and sample reports so you can understand who will be advising you before you instruct.
Yes. Company-level reviews and qualifications do not necessarily tell you who will actually undertake your survey. Before appointment, establish the name, professional qualification and relevant experience of the individual expected to inspect the property.
Also ask who will technically review their report before issue.
Potentially, yes.
If the client received good communication, a quick report and convincing advice, they may genuinely consider the service excellent.
If an incorrect diagnosis or missed defect only becomes apparent months later, or never becomes apparent at all the reviewer would have had no reason to mark the service down at the time.
This is why customer satisfaction and technical competence should be considered separately.
Not automatically. We have little to no control over what is posted in reviews.
Look at what the complaint concerns and how the firm responded.
A complaint about appointment availability is very different from an allegation concerning technical advice. Similarly, firms can be subject to reviews from disgruntled people who didn’t take the advice they were given, vendors who didn’t appreciate the report findings, or just online trolls like every other business.
Likewise, a professional and constructive response to a genuine complaint may actually tell you something useful about how the firm handles problems.
We suggest using reviews after completing more objective checks.
Start by verifying the individual’s professional qualification.
Then establish relevant experience, who will undertake the inspection, how the report will be technically reviewed, the scope of the service and the quality of a sample report.
Finally, use reviews to understand how previous clients experienced working with the surveyor.
Qualification tells you what has been independently assessed.
Experience tells you what knowledge the surveyor brings.
QA tells you whether another professional has challenged the output.
A sample report shows you what they produce.
Reviews tell you how clients experienced the service.
Together, they provide a much more useful picture.
About the Author
Joshua Weston BSc (Hons) MRICS IHBC is a Chartered Building Surveyor and Director of Fourth Wall Building Consultancy.
Joshua advises residential and commercial property owners on building condition, defects, repairs and refurbishment, with experience extending well beyond undertaking Home Surveys. His work includes diagnosing building defects, specifying and managing repair projects, contract administration, building conservation, listed buildings and reviewing defective construction work.
This practical involvement in buildings before, during and after repair informs Fourth Wall’s approach to residential surveys: identifying a defect is only part of the job. The advice should also explain why it has occurred, how significant it is, how it should realistically be repaired and what the implications are for the purchaser.
Joshua is a member of the RICS Building Surveying & Building Control Professional Group Panel, a member of the Institute of Historic Building Conservation (IHBC), and was named RICS Building Surveyor of the Year in 2022.
